Saturday, February 07, 2004

Paul Krugman reviews 2 books on George W. Bush

From The New York Review of Books: The Wars of the Texas Succession. The books reviewed are:
  • American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush
    by Kevin Phillips
    Viking, 397 pp., $25.95
  • The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill
    by Ron Suskind
    Simon and Schuster, 348 pp., $26.00
  • Mr. Krugman on Mr. Bush's corruption:

    In any previous administration—at least any administration of the past seventy years—this sort of incestuous relationship among foreign governments, private businesses, and the personal fortunes of people in or close to the US government would have been considered unusual and prima facie scandalous. What we learn from Kevin Phillips's new book, however, is that this kind of intertwining of public policy and personal self-interest has been standard operating procedure not just for George W. Bush, but for his entire family.
    The Bush family sees itself as a dynasty in the making. Read the review for more about how the Bush family has enriched itself at the public trough and shady business deals for generations.

    And here's something for Christians to think about:
    What Phillips doesn't explain, or at least not to my satisfaction, is why crony capitalists have been able to make an effective alliance with the religious right, while other groups—say, Democrats tied to the labor movement —have not. After all, fundamentalists in America are, on average, relatively poor, and tend to be hurt by right-wing economic policies. It's true that, as Phillips points out, modern fundamentalist doctrine encourages a belief in self-reliance, with a corresponding benign attitude toward wealth and hostility to policies that redistribute income. But the Bush family does not, to say the least, consist of self-made men, and its policies actually do involve redistribution—from the have-nots to the haves. What makes religious leaders see an elite dynasty as their friend?

    Mr. Krugman on The Price of Loyalty:

    Ron Suskind—an investigative reporter with a knack for getting insiders to tell what they know —offers a detailed, deeply disturbing look at how the Bush administration makes policy.
    Here's an example of Bush policy-making at its finest: the steel tariff.
    Or take the steel tariff. The decision to impose a tariff on steel imports was a terrible one in every way one can think of. It was bad for the economy; it was obviously illegal under international law. It squandered US credibility on trade issues; it was a clear betrayal of the administration's own rhetorical commitment to free trade and free markets. But throwing steel-producing regions a bone might—just might—yield some small political gains.

    The Clinton administration refused to impose a steel tariff even during the 2000 campaign; had it betrayed its principles, West Virginia might have gone to Al Gore, who would now be in the White House. When the issue arose again in early 2002, Bush was still immensely popular. "If you can't do the right thing when you're at 85 percent approval, when can you do the right thing?" asked one official. But politics prevailed, and the tariff went through. (The tariff was later rescinded, after the World Trade Organization—predictably—ruled that it violated international law. But the damage was done: US credibility on trade issues had been damaged severely. Partly because of this loss of credibility, international trade negotiations—supposedly an administration priority —have stalled.)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    What emerges from Suskind's book is a picture of an entirely cynical administration—much more cynical than Nixon's, in which the corruption was localized, and large parts of the policy process continued to be run by serious, even idealistic people. (Old hands at the Environmental Protection Agency describe the Nixon administration as a golden age.) Under Bush, it seems, political rhetoric bears no relation to reality—what officials say has nothing in common with what they do, or what they think. And policy decisions are driven almost entirely by politics, by what the political arm thinks will play well with "the base."